Pages

Monday, December 22, 2014

In the Metro Council meeting of December 2, the Council passed RESOLUTION NO. RS2014-1300 sponsored by Council Member Peter Westerholm which expressed the will of the Council in supporting efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and
supporting President Obama’s Clean Power Plan to reduce carbon pollution
from power plants.

While the Council passed the resolution, I am delighted that 12 members voted against it. All of the Council members who I think of as the "good" councilmen, because they have in the past had a conservative voting record or identify as Republicans or just seem like rational, reasonable people voted against the bill with the exception of Carter Todd who is identified as a Republican but who voted for it. Emily Evans who I think of as one of the "good" council members voted to abstain.

I was also very pleased to see Karen Johnson vote to abstain. I personally like Karen Johnson a lot, but she does not self identify as a Republican or conservative, but I am proud of her for voting to abstain on this bill rather than voting for it.

In the past the Council has unanimously voted for some atrociously bad bills similar to this. A special recognition goes to Josh Stites who is on the Rules Committee. All memorizing resolutions go before this committee and Josh was the lone "no" vote in committee. If not for his "no" vote, this resolution would have been on the "consent" agenda and may have passed without descent or discussion. Also Council Member Duane Dominy deserves special recognition for his argument against the resolution on the floor of the Council.

Recently the State Senate Government Operation Committee took a look at the same EPA action that the Council voted to support and heard testimony from leading state and industry officials regarding this EPA rule. Of this EPA policy, Senate Government Operations Committee
Chairman Mike Bell had this to say:

The testimony we heard Tuesday makes it very clear that the rules
proposed by the EPA not only overstep their jurisdiction, but if enacted
will cost Tennesseans greatly in terms of higher electric bills, job
loss and productivity. The founding fathers never intended for the federal
government to be preeminent in every facet of our daily lives. These
rules go far beyond their constitutional authority, stripping the state
of its authority in this regard and encroaching on the personal
liberties of our citizens.

Tennessee Commissioner of Environment and Conservation Bob Martineau
briefed Committee members on 97 pages of comments that the state made in
response to the Clean Air Act rule. He said the state requested that
the carbon emission reduction targets set by the EPA for Tennessee be
“reduced and adjusted.” Several presenters at the meeting called the
targets “unattainable.” They also said the proposed rules punish states,
like Tennessee, which made early efforts to reduce carbon emissions
prior to the 2012 benchmark used in calculating state-based reduction
targets.

Paul Bailey of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Energy said
their studies project an average annual increase in retail electricity
prices of 14% to 18% over the next decade.

Justin Owen, President and CEO of the Beacon Center, told committee
members, “These federal rules ignore the different and unique energy
portfolios, needs and problems faced by each individual state. For
example, because Tennessee relies more heavily on electricity generated
by coal-fired plants, our state citizens will be burdened more severely
than those in other states.”

Owen said a Suffolk University study shows that emission rules on new
power plants could cost upwards of $208 million in Tennessee. The rule
for existing plants could cost $394 million according to the study,
while the mercury emissions rule could cost $727 million, for a total of
more than $1.3 billion.

While the State Senate held hearings on the issue, our Metro Council voted for the new EPA rules without any studies or hearings being done or any insight as to what the new rules would cost Tennesseans. These issues are complicated and in my view the Council should recognize they are Councilmen and not U.S. representatives and should avoid putting the Council on record about things of which they have little knowledge.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Disclaimer

As the author of A Disgruntled Republican I often post items which I think may be of interest to the conservative, Republican, libertarian or the greater community. Posting of a press release or an announcement of an event does not necessarily indicate an endorsement. Rod